When the Commission tried to make its own reporting obligations discretionary, Parliament pushed back. MEPs on the ECON committee voted Tuesday to keep fiscal surveillance reports mandatory — stripping language that would have turned binding oversight requirements into mere defaults. The package now heads to trilogue, with the Council yet to show its hand.
The Commission framed the package as a technical alignment exercise — aligning legacy surveillance rules with the 2024 fiscal framework reform. But co-rapporteurs Markus Ferber (EPP/DEU) and Carla Tavares (S&D/PT) used their draft reports to push back against a specific pattern in the Commission’s text.
At issue was the insertion of the phrase “as a rule” into mandatory reporting obligations — which would have turned binding requirements into mere defaults. Both amendments strike that language, with the explicit justification of reducing the discretionary power of the Commission.
Parliament draws the line
“Safeguarding the rights of the European Parliament was a key element for me in the negotiations,” co-rapporteur Markus Ferber (EPP) said. “That will be one of the key points to be discussed with the Council as well—for us, it is unacceptable that the Council is more involved in all stages than the Parliament.”
ECON voted Tuesday to adopt its position on two regulations amending the EU’s fiscal surveillance rules. The first governs enhanced monitoring of eurozone members under financial stress. It triggers closer Commission oversight of a country’s budget when it is approaching a bailout programme.
You might be interested
The second covers rules that form the broader architecture of the EU’s budgetary surveillance framework, parts of the Six-Pack and Two-Pack legislative packages.
The votes cleared a trilogue mandate, but the substance of the EP’s position tells the more interesting story. On the broader file, the rapporteurs went further. They rejected Commission proposals to merge existing economic dialogue provisions. Instead, they restored parliamentary scrutiny rights and member states’ right to participate in exchanges of views when subject to Commission recommendations.
Heading to trilogue
The package now heads to trilogue.The Council has not yet formally signalled its position. How fast negotiations move will depend on how far member states are willing to back Commission flexibility over parliamentary scrutiny.
For us, it is unacceptable that the Council is more involved in all stages than the Parliament.
— Markus Ferber, co-rapporteur (EPP/DEU)
The broader stakes go beyond technical wording. Whether “as a rule” stays or goes will shape how much flexibility the Commission retains when monitoring countries under financial stress — and whether Parliament has a guaranteed right to be kept informed. – jen si odkládám
